Prairie Rattlesnake Conservation Management Plan 2016-2021 - Alberta Species at Risk Conservation Management Plan No. 12
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Prairie Rattlesnake
Conservation Management Plan
2016-2021
Alberta Species at Risk Conservation Management Plan No. 12Prairie Rattlesnake
Conservation Management Plan
2016-2021
Prepared by:
Adam Martinson
January 2016ISBN 978-1-4601-2200-6 (PDF)
ISSN: 1922-9984
For copies of this report, contact:
Information Centre – Publications
Alberta Environment and Parks
Main Floor, Great West life Building
9920 – 108 Street
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5K 2M4
Telephone: (780) 422-2079
OR
Visit the Species at Risk Program web site at:
http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/species-at-risk/default.aspx
This publication may be cited as:
Alberta Environment and Parks. 2016. Prairie Rattlesnake Conservation Management Plan 2016-
2021. Alberta Environment and Parks. Species at Risk Conservation Management Plan No.12.
Edmonton, AB. 10 pp.
iiPREFACE
Albertans are fortunate to share their province with a diversity of wild species. A small number
of these species are classified as Species of Special Concern because they have characteristics
that make them particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events. Special conservation
measures are necessary to ensure that these species do not become Endangered or Threatened.
Conservation management plans are developed for Species of Special Concern to provide
guidance for land and resource management decisions that affect the species and their habitat.
These plans are intended to be a resource tool for provincial and regional fish and wildlife, land
and resource management staff in Alberta Environment and Parks and other government
departments.
Conservation management plans provide background information including species biology,
threats to species and habitat, and inventory/monitoring history. Plans also provide a goal,
objectives, and actions (management recommendations). Management recommendations are
typically categorised into inventory and monitoring needs; habitat management and
conservation; education and communication; and additional management considerations as
required.
Conservation management plans are generally prepared by an Alberta Environment and Parks
fish and wildlife biologist who has been designated as the provincial species lead. Writers from
outside the department are occasionally sought to prepare plans for species for which there is
little in-house expertise. In order to ensure accuracy and utility, each plan is reviewed by a
species expert and a designated provincial representative from forestry or land management
programs. In some cases there may be additional reviewers from staff, industry, and other
agencies.
Conservation management plans are internal guidance documents. They are implemented under
the guidance of the species lead and are “living” documents that can be revised at any time as
required. Conservation management plans are more succinct than the recovery plans that are
prepared for Endangered and Threatened species and do not involve participation of a multi-
stakeholder team.
Conservation management plans are approved by the Executive Director of Fish and Wildlife
Policy. Plans will be reviewed annually by the species lead and updated if necessary, and a more
in-depth review will occur five years after a plan’s approval.
iiiTABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ...................................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ v
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Breeding Biology ................................................ 1
1.2 Threats to Population ........................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Provincial Monitoring History ............................................................................................. 4
2.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Goal ...................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 5
3.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIONS ................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Inventory and Monitoring .................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Education and Communication ............................................................................................ 6
3.3 Habitat Protection ................................................................................................................. 7
4.0 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ 8
5.0 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................................................................... 8
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Distribution of prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta…………………………………………..2
ivACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to Dennis Jørgensen (World Wildlife Fund), Lisa Wilkinson (Alberta Environment
and Parks) and Joel Nicholson (Alberta Environment and Parks) for reviewing the draft.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Prairie rattlesnakes are a Species of Special Concern in Alberta. Their reduced reproductive
potential as a result of late maturity, relatively small litters, and biennial or triennial reproductive
cycles, means that the species has a reduced capacity to respond to stochastic population
declines. Some prairie rattlesnakes travel long distances during the active season which results in
an increased risk of mortality. Major threats to the species include road mortality, cultivation,
energy development, urban development and intentional persecution by humans. Ensuring the
viability of existing populations in the province will require focus on inventory and monitoring,
communication and outreach, and habitat management and protection. With the diversity of land
ownership and management that exists within the prairie rattlesnakes range in Alberta, a variety
of tools need to be considered and applied, with a specific emphasis on educating government,
industry, and landowners about the species.
v1.0 INTRODUCTION
The prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) is a Species of Special Concern in Alberta. This
listing occurred because the population is likely to continue to decline if current activities
and trends persist, and the population size and area of occupancy are small. The
provincial range of the species is known to have contracted from its historical extent. The
prairie rattlesnake is protected as a Non-Game Animal under the Wildlife Act.
The Alberta Endangered Species Conservation Committee (AESCC) Initial Conservation
Action Statement for prairie rattlesnake (AESCC 2013) recommends the following:
1. Identifying the species as a Species of Special Concern in Alberta,
2. Providing year-round habitat protection for birthing dens (hereafter referred to as
rookeries),
3. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (AESRD)
developing and implementing a conservation and management strategy for the
species, and
4. AESRD securing new resources to collect information on population sizes and
trends and reassessing the status of the species within five years.
1.1 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Breeding Biology
The global range of the prairie rattlesnake extends from southern Canada, through the
central USA and into the northern portion of Mexico (NatureServe 2013). In Alberta, the
distribution of prairie rattlesnakes is limited to the southeast corner of the province
(Figure 1). For a detailed review of the distribution of the species within Alberta, see the
AESRD and Alberta Conservation Association (ACA) provincial status report update
(AESRD and ACA 2012).
Essential habitat requirements for prairie rattlesnakes include hibernacula, rookeries (i.e.,
gestation sites or birthing dens), foraging areas and movement corridors that connect
these habitat features. The majority of hibernacula in Alberta are closely associated with
major rivers and coulees (Gannon 1978 as cited by Nicholson and Rose 2001; Martinson
and Wielki 2012) and within transition zones between riparian and upland habitats
(Andrus 2010; Gannon 1978 as cited by AESRD and ACA 2012). Hibernacula typically
have a south, southeast or east facing aspect, however this can be influenced by microsite
characteristics. They can consist of holes or cracks in the earth caused by, or associated
with, a variety of biological and physical phenomena including slumping topography,
erosion, remnant water channels, loose soil, sinkholes, rocky outcrops, fissures and
mammal burrows. Prairie rattlesnakes den communally in Canada, often in large
numbers, and site fidelity of up to 95% has been documented (Jørgensen 2009; Shipley et
al. 2013). Individuals typically leave their hibernaculum by mid-May, and return by the
end of October, although these dates can vary annually due to weather conditions
(Martinson per obs). Migration distances for males and non-gravid females vary by
individual. The maximum straight-line migration distance from dens generally ranges
from 2 to 20km (Didiuk 2003; Gardiner 2012; Jørgensen 2009; Powell et al. 1998)
however; the maximum distance observed in Alberta was 25km on Canadian Forces Base
Suffield (Didiuk 1999 as cited in Didiuk 2003).Mating usually occurs in mid-to late summer, though mating has also been observed in
spring and fall, with females giving birth the following year (Aldridge 1993; Russell and
Bauer 1993). For gravid females, rookeries provide optimum thermoregulatory
conditions for embryonic development and cover from predation. Rookeries may occur at
hibernacula or be separate sites, typically within 1 km of the gravid female’s
hibernaculum (AESRD and ACA 2012; Andrus 2010; Jørgensen and Nicholson 2007;
Martinson 2009a). Prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta have low reproductive capacity and
recruitment because of late reproductive maturity, relatively small litters, and biennial or
triennial reproductive cycles (Jørgensen and Nicholson 2007, Macartney and Weichel
1993, Russell and Bauer 1993). This reduced reproductive capacity results in populations
being sensitive to the removal of sexually mature individuals with a limited ability to
rapidly recover from population declines.
Figure 1. From AESRD and ACA 2012. Recent (1980 to 2011) and historical (1894 to
1979) records of prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta. Dashed line indicates the species’
estimated range as of 1977 (Pendelbury 1977).
21.2 Threats to Population
The main threats to prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta affect the species through both direct
mortality and habitat degradation. Hibernacula are particularly important habitat
components because of their limited occurrence on the landscape, the high densities of
prairie rattlesnakes present at sites during certain times of the year, high fidelity to these
sites, and the absolute need for these sites in order to survive extreme winter
temperatures.
1.2.1 Road Mortality
Road mortality is a major threat to prairie rattlesnakes and can play a role in other threats
that affect the species (e.g., roads associated with oil and gas production). More than
95,000 km of roads cover the Grasslands Natural Region in Alberta, which includes the
range of prairie rattlesnakes (Alberta Environmental Protection 1997, as cited by AESRD
and ACA 2012). Roads pose a threat to prairie rattlesnakes predominantly through direct
mortality, which has been documented empirically (Martinson 2009b; Weyer et al. 2014)
and anecdotally (Gushulak pers. comm. 2013). Drivers have also been documented
intentionally running over prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta (Jørgensen pers. comm. 2013;
Martinson unpub. data). Prairie rattlesnakes were significantly more likely to be killed on
roads relative to three other snake species (bullsnake [Pituophis catenifer sayi],
wandering gartersnake [Thamnopis elegans] and plains gartersnake [Thamnophis radix]),
near Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta (Martinson 2009b). Prairie rattlesnakes are
particularly susceptible to road mortality because:
1. Long migration distances increase the likelihood of road crossings and encounters
with vehicles,
2. High migration route fidelity means individual snakes may cross the same road(s)
twice per season,
3. High density of roads within the Grasslands Natural Area increases the likelihood
of individuals encountering roads,
4. Large size makes rattlesnakes more likely to be accidentally hit on roads and easy
targets for drivers intent on hitting them (Martinson 2009b),
5. Colouration makes rattlesnakes hard to see and avoid on gravel or dirt roads
(Martinson pers. obs.),
6. Rattlesnakes move relatively slowly when crossing roads (Martinson 2009b;
Weyer et al. 2014),
7. Rattlesnakes may thermoregulate on road surfaces (Gardiner et al. 2013;
Martinson 2009b), and
8. Rattlesnakes’ defensive behaviour (i.e. coiling rather than fleeing when
threatened) results in longer periods of exposure to risk on roads (Andrews et al.
2005).
1.2.2 Agricultural Development
Agricultural activity is pervasive within the range of the prairie rattlesnake in Alberta.
Although habitat loss due to cultivation has slowed dramatically, direct mortality and
associated population isolation are ongoing threats across the cultivated landscape.
Conversion of native prairie to intensive cropland reduces the quantity and quality of
available foraging habitat and is presumed to have contributed to the historical range
3reduction of the prairie rattlesnake in Alberta (Pendlebury 1977; Rose 2001). In addition,
cultivation in riparian areas may also result in the destruction of hibernacula (Jørgensen
2009; Rose 2001).
1.2.3 Oil and Gas Development
Industrial development in the energy sector is a threat to the prairie rattlesnake due to
habitat loss and degradation, and direct mortality. Rattlesnakes can be susceptible to
being trapped in excavations such as pipeline trenches or caisons (Didiuk 1999, as cited
by AESRD and ACA 2012), or having their hibernacula destroyed if not identified during
a pre-construction wildlife survey (Nicholson and Rose 2001). There is some evidence
suggesting a link between prairie rattlesnake population declines and increased intensity
of traffic associated with energy development in areas surrounding hibernacula (Proctor
et al. 2009).
1.2.4 Urban Development
Urbanization within the range of the prairie rattlesnake results in direct habitat loss,
mortality of snakes, reduction of connectivity, and isolation of populations. These threats
are predominantly associated with the presence and expansion of two urban centres in
Alberta: Medicine Hat (population: 60,005) and Lethbridge (population: 83,517;
Statistics Canada 2012). In addition to direct habitat loss, where urban or near-urban
habitat is protected, or not yet developed, remaining rattlesnakes are subject to increased
levels of mortality through direct persecution and being struck by vehicles on roads. In
addition, rattlesnakes are periodically relocated when they are found in urban areas. The
results of relocation of snakes is not well understood, but it is likely that there are
negative impacts related to successful navigation back to hibernacula.
1.2.5 Intentional Persecution
Intentional persecution en masse and destruction of hibernacula are thought to have
played a role in the historical decline of prairie rattlesnake in Alberta (AESRD and ACA
2012). Rattlesnakes are most susceptible to catastrophic events such as large-scale illegal
harvesting and alterations to hibernacula since these activities may rapidly and drastically
reduce the size and alter the composition of snake populations (Gardiner and Sonmor
2011). There is some evidence to suggest that public education campaigns may reduce
the incidence of intentional persecution to prairie rattlesnakes, at least at the local scale,
however there are still reports of prairie rattlesnakes being targeted and killed illegally (J.
Nicolson pers. comm. 2015).
1.3 Provincial Monitoring History
The first assessment of the provincial prairie rattlesnake range was completed in 1960’s
(Stebbins 1966) and was later refined in 1977 through a mail out questionnaire
(Pendlebury 1977). Since 1996, the Alberta Conservation Association, first through the
Alberta Snake Hibernacula Inventory and then through the Alberta Volunteer Amphibian
Monitoring Program, has encouraged submissions of incidental observations of reptiles
and their hibernacula (AESRD and ACA 2012). AESRD and ACA (2012) reported an
increase in survey effort for the species between 2003 and 2012 due to various research
initiatives. Targeted search effort in Alberta has been concentrated in areas including
easy-to-access sites (e.g., along roads), along the Milk River system (MULTISAR
program: AESRD and ACA 2012), the Red Deer River system (from Brooks, Alberta to
4Saskatchewan border: Martinson 2009; Rose 2001), the Oldman River in Lethbridge
(Andrus 2010), and the South Saskatchewan River in the Medicine Hat area (numerous
studies described in AESRD and ACA 2012). Since 2008 there has been an ongoing
mark-recapture study at Dinosaur Provincial Park that has marked 334 individual prairie
rattlesnakes as of November 2014, with the intent of producing a population estimate for
the park in the next several years (Martinson, unpublished data).
2.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
2.1 Goal
Maintain the current distribution and breeding populations of prairie rattlesnakes and,
where possible, restore populations that have experienced declines.
2.2 Objectives
1. Inventory and Monitoring: Implement long-term mark and recapture surveys at
known hibernacula sites to establish population trends. Additional inventories
should be conducted in suitable habitat to identify undocumented hibernacula.
2. Education and Communication: Enhance education and communication regarding
the importance of prairie rattlesnakes and their habitats with government,
industry, public and landowners. Reducing fear of the species is important to
successful conservation.
3. Habitat Protection: Develop and implement habitat protection for hibernacula and
rookeries on public, private, and municipal land.
3.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
3.1 Inventory and Monitoring
Although there has been increased survey effort for prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta since
2003, still relatively little is known about the population size and trends in the province.
It is essential to increase inventory and monitoring efforts so conservation targets can be
set and progress can be measured.
Mark and Recapture
Through long-term mark and recapture studies at known hibernacula, population trends
can be estimated across the province. Potential areas with known hibernacula that could
be monitored include Dinosaur Provincial Park, Bindloss, Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, and
Writing-on-Stone Provincial Park. This monitoring should be conducted on a biannual
basis over the course of numerous days in the spring and fall when the likelihood of
encountering snakes at hibernacula is highest. Two methods that could be employed for
capturing prairie rattlesnakes include (1) installing drift fences with funnel traps around
entrances to hibernacula (Martinson 2009a), or (2) opportunistic captures from repeated
surveys of the sites. Each captured rattlesnake should be implanted with a passive
5integrated transponder (PIT) tag for future identification and to enable robust capture-
recapture analysis. An added benefit of PIT tagging individuals is the future potential to
use remote solar-powered scanning equipment and data loggers for non-invasive
monitoring of hibernacula use. Similar work has been ongoing at Dinosaur Provincial
Park since 2008 (Martinson unpub. data).
Identification of Hibernacula and Rookeries
The difficulty in identifying hibernacula and rookery sites in the field means many of
these locations go undocumented and unprotected. Focused searches should be conducted
within high quality habitat as identified in previous habitat modelling efforts (Martinson
and Wielki 2012, Fast 2003). These searches should be conducted in spring and fall
during optimal conditions for observing snakes basking near hibernacula. Searches
should be conducted on foot or by mountain bike to increase search efficiency and
likelihood of detection. Numerous searches of the same area over multiple seasons may
be required to either confirm that a site is being used as a hibernaculum, or to infer that
no sites have been missed. The inconspicuous nature of hibernacula and rookeries can
make their identification in the field both time consuming and challenging.
In addition to a large-scale survey program, industry should be conducting appropriate
pre-development hibernacula and rookery surveys to identify undocumented sites when
working in snake habitat. The results of these surveys should be reported into the Fish
and Wildlife Management Information System (FWMIS).
3.2 Education and Communication
Snakes, rattlesnakes in particular, are commonly perceived negatively by the public. It is
likely that there will be little support for conservation measures if people continue to
view prairie rattlesnakes as pests or a significant safety risk. Educating all Albertans,
including governments, industry and landowners, about the benefits of having prairie
rattlesnakes on the landscape (e.g., rodent control), and how to safely coexists with them
will not only reduce rattlesnake mortality, but also increase the likelihood of habitat
management measures being adopted where they cannot be legislated (e.g., private land).
Fish and Wildlife (FW - Operations and Policy and Planning divisions) at AEP should
provide information to, and collaborate with Alberta Parks, other government agencies
and non-government organizations interested in participating in outreach activities. The
focus should be on the value of native prairie habitats, complex riparian ecosystems, and
how prairie rattlesnakes are an important component of these systems. Outreach methods
that could be used include school talks, interpretive activities (e.g., presentations and field
trips) at parks, displays at community events, social media, and printed material directed
toward the general public. The inventory and monitoring programs discussed above could
be highlighted during outreach activities and an example of this is currently ongoing at
Dinosaur Provincial Park.
Wildlife and habitat managers should work with industry and private landowners to raise
awareness of the importance of prairie rattlesnakes and provide information on how to
live and work safely in prairie rattlesnake habitat. An example of raising awareness with
industry was the development of a safety and awareness video that is required training for
6all employees and contractors of an oil and gas company conducting work in prairie
rattlesnake habitat (http://vimeo.com/28910852).
3.3 Habitat Protection
Prairie rattlesnakes in Alberta are found on private, municipal, provincial, and federal
land. With such a diverse range of landowners and managers, the habitat management
methods also need to be diverse. Because the species disperses over such large areas in
low densities during the active season, habitat protection measures should be focused on
hibernacula, rookeries and the foraging areas in close proximity to these sites. Both
hibernacula and rookeries are protected year-round from disturbance under the Wildlife
Act; however it is unlikely that this protection alone will be enough to ensure the
populations in Alberta are maintained in their current state. Therefore, it is also important
to reduce fragmentation of habitat to maintain population connectivity.
On public lands, legislated guidelines and restrictions are the tools utilised for habitat
protection. The current setback from hibernacula is 500m, however, rookeries are known
to be located within 1000m of hibernacula (AESRD and ACA 2012; Andrus 2010;
Jørgensen and Nicholson 2007; Martinson 2009a). A 1000m setback distance is needed
for more effective protection. This setback would help to reduce the anthropogenic
mortality risk for the most sensitive individuals, gravid females, when travelling between
their hibernaculum and rookery (Jørgensen and Nicholson 2007). Moreover,
undocumented rookeries would likely be protected. Protective Notations (PNTs),
stipulating setback distance, should be applied.
Careful consideration should be made for roads proposed in sensitive snake range. New
road development within 10km of hibernacula should be discouraged, and only
considered with strict mitigation, such as seasonal closures (i.e. spring and fall) or the
installation of underpasses. The installation of underpasses should also be considered for
existing roads at known high road-kill areas or migration routes.
Protection measures on private land are more difficult to enforce and warrant a different
approach than on public land, because there are fewer regulatory tools on private lands.
Education and outreach with land managers will be critical for successful implementation
of conservation measures. Preferably, the guidelines and standards on public land should
be adhered to on private land. Alternatively, best management practices (BMPs) should
be developed to guide development decisions. BMPs should be provided to regulators for
consideration during the review of developments on private land, and municipal
governments for their consideration during the planning of new urban developments.
Spatial data and management guidelines need to be integrated into current policies and
processes so that they are readily available to these stakeholders.
Other protection measures such as conservation easements and stewardship programs
should also be pursued on private land. An additional tool that should be implemented is
a recognition program for landowners who protect prairie rattlesnake hibernacula. This
could be implemented in conjunction with existing programs (e.g., MULTISAR) that are
already successfully engaging and recognizing landowners in southeastern Alberta.
74.0 SUMMARY
Prairie rattlesnakes are a Species of Special Concern in Alberta. Their reduced
reproductive potential as a result of late maturity, relatively small litters, and biennial or
triennial reproductive cycles, means that the species has a reduced capacity to respond to
stochastic population declines. Some prairie rattlesnakes travel long distances during the
active season which results in an increased risk of mortality. Major threats to the species
include road mortality, cultivation, energy development, urban development and
intentional persecution by humans. Ensuring the viability of existing populations in the
province will require focus on inventory and monitoring, communication and outreach,
and habitat management and protection. With the diversity of land ownership and
management that exists within the prairie rattlesnakes range in Alberta, a variety of tools
need to be considered and applied, with a specific emphasis on educating government,
industry, and landowners about the species.
5.0 LITERATURE CITED
Alberta Endangered Species Conservation Committee (AESCC). 2013. Prairie Rattlesnake Initial
Conservation Action Statement: Recommended to the Minister of Environment and
Sustainable Resource Development. February 2013.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development and Alberta Conservation
Association (AESRD and ACA). 2012. Status of the Prairie Rattlesnake (Crotalus
viridis) in Alberta: Update 2012. Alberta Wildlife Status Report No. 6 (update 2012).
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, Edmonton, AB. 49 pp.
Aldridge, R. D. 1993. Male reproductive anatomy and seasonal occurrence of mating and combat
behavior of the rattlesnake Crotalus v. viridis. Journal of Herpetology 27(4): 481-484.
Andrews, K. M., J. W. Gibbons and T. Reeder. 2005. How do highways influence snake
movement? Behavioral responses to roads and vehicles. Copeia 2005(4): 772-782.
Andrus, W. 2010. Ecology and conservation of Prairie Rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis viridis) in
relation to movement in a fragmented urban environment. M.Sc. dissertation, University
of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. 80 pp.
Didiuk, A. 2003. CFB Suffield and Suffield National Wildlife Area Cooperative Reptile and
Amphibian Studies. Snake Conservation Research and Management 2002. Canadian
Wildlife Service, Saskatoon, SK. 52 pp.
Fast, A. 2003. Models for predicting the occurrence of gravid Prairie Rattlesnake (Crotalus
viridis viridis) habitat and hibernacula in Alberta. M.E.Des dissertation, University of
Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. 76 pp.
Gardiner, L. E. 2012. Comparative ecology of three sympatric snake species in southwestern
Saskatchewan. M.Sc. dissertation, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
79 pp.
8Gardiner, L. E., C. M. Somers, J. A. Martino, D. L. Parker and R. G. Poulin. 2013. Balancing the
dumbbell: Summer habitats need protection in addition to winter dens for northern snake
communities. The Journal of Wildlife Management 77(5): 975-982.
Gardiner, L. E. and K. W. Sonmor. 2011. Major slump event at Grasslands National Park Snake
Pit in southwestern Saskatchewan. Blue Jay 69(1): 120-124.
Gushulak, N., pers. comm. 2013. Email correspondence to Jonathan Choquette. November 2013.
Field Herpetologist, Brandon, MB.
Jørgensen, D. 2009. Annual migrations of female Prairie Rattlesnakes, Crotalus v. viridis, in
Alberta. MEDes dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 86 pp.
Jørgensen, D., pers. comm. 2013. Email correspondence to A. Martinson. April 2013. Program
Officer, World Wildlife Fund, Bozeman, MT, USA.
Jørgensen, D. and J. Nicholson. 2007. Reproductive biology of female Prairie Rattlesnakes
(Crotalus viridis viridis) in Alberta. Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 103. Alberta
Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division, Edmonton, AB. 34 pp.
Macartney, M. and B. Weichel. 1993. Population status and biology of the Prairie Rattlesnake
and other reptile species in southwest Saskatchewan, 1990 - 1991. Johnson and Weichel
Resource Management Consultants, Saskatoon, SK. 23 pp.
Martinson, A. 2009a. Prairie Rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis viridis) and Bullsnakes (Pituophis
catenifer sayi) in and around Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta. Interim Report. Calgary,
AB. 50 pp.
Martinson, A. 2009b. Modeling road mortality of Prairie Rattlesnakes and Bullsnakes in Alberta.
M.E.Des dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. 132 pp.
Martinson, A. and J. Wielki. 2012. Revised Prairie Rattlesnake Habitat Suitability Index Model.
Prepared by TERA Environmental Consultants for MULTISAR and Alberta
Conservation Association, Calgary, AB. 16 pp.
NatureServe. 2013. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application].
NatureServe. Web Site: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer [accessed Feb. 2013].
Nicholson, J., pers. comm. 2015. Email correspondence to Adam Martinson. February 2015.
AESRD Senior Species at Risk Biologist, Medicine Hat, AB.
Nicholson, J. and S. Rose. 2001. Utilization of Air Photo Interpretation to Locate Prairie
Rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis viridis) Hibernacula in the South Saskatchewan River
Valley. Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 22. Alberta Sustainable Resource
Development, Fisheries and Wildlife Management Division, Edmonton, AB. 14 pp.
Pendlebury, G. B. 1977. Distribution and abundance of the Prairie Rattlesnake, Crotalus viridis
viridis, in Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 1(91): 122-129.
Powell, G. L., A. P. Russell, M. M. A. Hill, N. E. O'Brien and J. Skilnick. 1998. A Preliminary
investigation of movements, habitat use, and population trends in the Prairie Rattlesnake
(Crotalus viridis) in a multi-use rural landscape in southeastern Alberta. Department of
Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. 20 pp.
9Proctor, M., C. L. Lausen, E. Hofman, J. Boulanger and J. Nicholson. 2009. Mark-recapture
population estimate of a Prairie Rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis viridis) hibernaculum at
Kennedy Coulee, Red Deer River near Bindloss, Alberta. Alberta Species at Risk Report
No. 122. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division,
Edmonton, AB. 27 pp.
Rose, S. L. 2001. Prairie Rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis viridis) Monitoring in Alberta -
Preliminary Investigations (2000). Alberta Species at Risk Report. Alberta Sustainable
Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division, Edmonton, AB. 11 pp.
Russell, A. P. and A. M. Bauer. 1993. The amphibians and reptiles of Alberta. University of
Calgary Press, Calgary, AB. 264 pp.
Shipley, B. K., D. Chiszar, K. T. Fitzgerald and A. J. Saviola. 2013. Spatial ecology of Prairie
Rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) associates with Black-tailed Prairie Dog (Cynomys
ludovicianus) colonies in Colorado. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 8(1): 240 -
250.
Statistics Canada. 2012. Focus on Geography Series, 2011 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue
no. 98-310- XWE 2011004. Web Site: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca [accessed June 2014].
Weyer, J., D. Jørgensen, T. Schmitt, T. J. Maxwell and C. D. Anderson. 2014. Lack of detectable
genetic differentiation between den populations of the Prairie Rattlesnake (Crotalus
viridis) in a fragmented landscape. Canadian Journal of Zoology. Published Online.
10List of Titles in the Alberta Species at Risk Conservation Management Plan Series
(as of January 2016)
No. 1 Long-toed Salamander Conservation Management Plan, 2010-2015.
No. 2 Sprague’s Pipit Conservation Management Plan, 2010-2015.
No. 3 Long-billed Curlew Conservation Management Plan, 2010-2015.
No. 4 Harlequin Duck Conservation Management Plan, 2010-2015.
No. 5 Weidemeyers Admiral Conservation Management Plan, 2012-2017
No. 6 Western Small-footed Bat Conservation Management Plan, 2012-2017
No. 7 White-winged Scoter Conservation Management Plan, 2012-2017
No. 8 Bull Trout Conservation Management Plan, 2012-2017
No. 9 Prairie Falcon Conservation Management Plan, 2012-2017.
No. 10 Black-throated Green Warbler, Bay-breasted and Cape May Warbler Conservation
Management Plan, 2014-2019.
No. 11 Great Plains Toad Conservation Management Plan, 2015-2020.
No. 12 Prairie Rattlesnake Conservation Management Plan, 2016-2020.You can also read
